So disgusted tonight

I think all teachers have that moment, total heart sink and not a little fear. I remember it well, even now, some 25 ish years later.

Completely agree, Tabby. I also sympathise with Joyce right now. She made a mistake. I've done it myself as a school teacher, made some tiny comment that you can see some kid in the class get all gleeful over, because they know they can tell their parents that one comment out of context and get them to call the school to try to get you into trouble.

Yeah! Cos that's precisely what I said!

Great example if the linguistic twist, the faux outrage if the deliberate misinterpretation 😁

It's 2022, if people think they can just throw videos up on youtube without others going through them with a fine toothcomb looking for juicy bits then they're being incredibly naive. Helen S should have picked that up in the editing."

There's soundbites, which remain faithful to the context of what was said, and there is malice which distorts what was said by ignoring the context.

This is unadulterated malice.

My understanding is that Wine with Women is a livestream and that the video stays up. I'd find it slightly more odd if the video were removed straight after and then posted after editing. Is that what other people do or only if they have Patreon sponsorship or similar?

Whether it's upthread here or somewhere on Twitter, I've seen the claim that the edited clips have >1M views. I'll observe that it seems there are currently <10.5K views of the original video. I

I looked on Twitter for a link to the full transcript and haven't found it.

So you don’t believe in anyone censoring themselves to not cause offence unless it’s someone you disagree with. Those ones are the “lying gobshites”

‘Being trans for many people has not just been about suffering but about finding community.’

I understand and, as I’ve already said, I disagree with her position. Some adults are going to be happier having transitioned, and whether I think their ideology is incoherent is irrelevant. With that said, if there is substantial evidence that physically transitioning harms the body or the mind in a great enough number of cases to give us concern, that becomes a society-level concern. Especially when many of the people assuming a trans identity are children. We really must ensure that we are giving people accurate information about what it is said to be.

But the point here is that I think Joyce is wrong on this, but I don’t think it is bigotry. I think it is disagreement.

Just as I'd be better off never having heard that being ginger is offensive, ugly.

Or that freckles are ugly.

Or that a Scouse accent makes me sound thick as mince, or a natural thief.

Lots of shit is offensive. There is no right not to be offended. And sometimes offence can be manufactured when none was offered. Which we are sometimes, but not always, supposed to support the person expressing offense. Making offence just one of those amorphous things that cannot be legislated for

Very well said, Bambino. 🙂

Of course it does, Tabby. But that assumes people will hear more than the soundbite our have any inclination to explore the context, which was obviously never going to happen with thousands upon thousands of people. And even if they did, her words could still be offensive to many people, who are happy with the lives they have.

There will be people who would never have lived the lives they did, met the friends and lovers they have, had they not identified as trans. Saying they would be better off never having been trans is devaluing their current lives. Being trans for many people has not just been about suffering but about finding community.

Because I don't think anyone, male or female, should self censor in order not offend those who take great pains to be offended.

Go rail at the lying gobshites who behave so poorly instead of suggesting women check their thinking, speaking, videoing!

Or perhaps just be thoughtful when editing your videos.

Why hand it to them on a plate?

You can make the most sensible, carefully crafted, nuanced statement and the TRAs will twist it. Every single time without exception. I don't actually see the need to pussy-foot around with temperate language when a bad faith interpretation will be made regardless. Anything other than female silence is literal genocide, so you might as well speak without worrying how the TRAs will lie.

Do you accept, GoodJanetBadJanet, that whilst worded offensively, this comment did not represent malice to anyone currently under the trans umbrella?

‘I have crooked teeth. If someone said they thought that the world would be a better place with fewer people with crooked teeth in it...’

But does it not depend at all whether they are suggesting violence towards people with crooked teeth, giving people with crooked teeth braces, or pulling the crooked teeth out?

@TheHeathers "Have you not heard of a 'soundbite'?
It's 2022, if people think they can just throw videos up on youtube without others going through them with a fine toothcomb looking for juicy bits then they're being incredibly naive. Helen S should have picked that up in the editing."

There's soundbites, which remain faithful to the context of what was said, and there is malice which distorts what was said by ignoring the context.

This is unadulterated malice.

Saying that in a sane world, we want to have as few people as possible with X is very likely to be offensive to all people with X. We can substitute all kinds of comparitors: Tourettes, autism, Down`s Syndrome. None of them would be okay, particularly from the mouth of someone that the vast majority of that group feel is hostile to them in the first place.
This

Which I am not doing.
I have crooked teeth. If someone said they thought that the world would be a better place with fewer people with crooked teeth in it, I personally would examine the context. But it's bloody obvious that lots of people with crooked teeth would think that was an offensive comment. It's obvious without saying it in the first place.
And I the context of Joyces statement it's obvious that the actors we know are involved will interpret this in the worst possible way. It was a mistake to say it, it has harmed her position with "floating voters" and given ammunition to her detractors.

Or perhaps just be thoughtful when editing your videos.

Why hand it to them on a plate?

That conversation occurred well over a week ago and it is only now that a very malicious person has chosen to make an edit of a tiny part of the whole discussion, to create an intended distortion and use it to stir up hatred and fear.

In truth, it is pathetic that someone chose to do this. Anyone who has read Helen's book knows her position, which is very far removed from the distortion that is being circulated.

The fact that some have pounced on that distortion with such aggression is intended to impede the free speech of others. The message is: "don't speak bluntly; only use words that we find acceptable or this is what happens to you".

I, for one, am not having it. Anyone who disagrees with the substance of what Helen said should argue their case in a rational manner. This is what free speech is about.

Just one of the squillion ways to shut up an opinionated woman.

If she won't stop speaking bastardise her words.

Same old same old

However, given the current climate, I think it's equally obvious that thousands of people will interpret her words in exactly that way.

The three main clips of it on twitter are on over one million views now.

Have you not heard of a 'soundbite'?

It's 2022, if people think they can just throw videos up on youtube without others going through them with a fine toothcomb looking for juicy bits then they're being incredibly naive. Helen S should have picked that up in the editing.

It ain’t. Genocide is murdering vast numbers of people in a systematic way for the purposes of eliminating a racial group from the gene pool. It is intensely offensive to compare Joyce’s argument that transition is harmful to the people transitioning to that.

It really is. But no one ever pulls these people up on it.

‘We think it's obvious that Joyce isn't suggesting a genocide. However, given the current climate, I think it's equally obvious that thousands of people will interpret her words in exactly that way.’

Given the current climate, it’s obvious that some people think ‘chickens don’t commit suicide’ is a case-winning argument.

It ain’t. Genocide is murdering vast numbers of people in a systematic way for the purposes of eliminating a racial group from the gene pool. It is intensely offensive to compare Joyce’s argument that transition is harmful to the people transitioning to that.

Own goal. Had a pedal stool moment there.

How doubling down?

And specifically on what?

Because all I have seen so far is an impassioned, blunt speech calling for better healthcare for trans people / kids.